Email

THE appointment of Punjab University’s new vice chancellor has shocked academia, liberal-minded students and a significant section of civil society because it bodes ill for the premier university.

The professor chosen to head the university deserves respect and consideration due to his learning and experience. His personal dignity cannot be assailed. What is at issue is the report that the new appointee had once served as head of the student organisation that has ruled the faculty and the campus for decades through unacceptable means. If this allegation is even partly true, a grave injustice seems to have been done to the institution, its faculty, its students, the cause of education and to the worthy professor himself.

The student organisation in question has no door for exit from its ranks; allegiance to it is for life. To expect a former office-bearer of this organisation to abandon his outlook and biases is like asking a cat to become a vegetarian. Apprehensions that the university’s non-partisan and fair-minded functioning will become difficult, to say the least, are quite valid.

Even if the new VC can somehow jettison his so-called ideological baggage, the student organisation will not release him from his bondage to them. For putting him through this ordeal, the selectors have been unfair to him and ignored the university’s need to be free from all kinds of fissiparous trends and influences.

Punjab University’s need to be free from fissiparous trends and influences has been ignored.

The way the vice chancellor of Punjab University has been selected — and one presumes a similar procedure is followed at other public-sector universities — diminishes the prestige a vice chancellor must enjoy.

The process began with an announcement by the Punjab government, through its higher education department, that it was looking for “highly accomplished, qualified and motivated candidates” for the position of the Punjab University vice chancellor. Candidates considering themselves eligible were invited to apply. However, somebody perhaps thought that highly qualified educationists might not like to join the queue, and nominations were invited from “renowned scholars/academicians, management experts” and, surprisingly, members of the search committee were also granted the privilege to nominate suitable candidates. One does not know if any candidates nominated through the latter method joined the recruitment mela, but let that pass.

The job was open to applicants “of any gender” up to 65 years old and who met a seven-point criterion that suggests the bureaucrats presiding over educational matters wanted the vice chancellor to be an experienced teacher, a capable administrator and a successful fundraiser. The omission of any reference to a candidate’s interest in and reputation for pushing the frontiers of knowledge forward, commitment to the university’s autonomy and academic freedom, any record of inspiring students to scale new heights in creative and critical thinking, and lack of any mention of the country’s educational goals, cannot be ignored. Whether this was due to ignorance or the impossibility of finding the right persons, the conclusion is extremely distressing.

Instead of creating a special package of salary and fringe benefits for the vice chancellor of the country’s oldest house of learning, he/she is offered a tenure track salary package allowed to a professor plus a job allowance at 20pc of the basic salary, and this in a province where the windfalls allowed to bureaucrats chosen to head companies are scandalously huge.

The candidates are graded on a 100-point scale: 20 points for academic qualifications; 30 for professional and leadership experience; 15 for publications and awards; and 35 for viva voce.

A scrutiny of a few of the requirements for securing marks (called points) is justified. For instance, a candidate capable of mobilising Rs500 million to one billion or more gets five points (while for writing a book one gets only two points). This idea has perhaps been taken from rich, capitalist countries and institutions that train experts needed by industrial and commercial enterprises. Neither of the two conditions applies to Punjab University. Pakistan’s priority is not collecting funds from non-state sources. The state is spending only around 2pc of GDP on education; its priority is to raise the allocation for education to at least 4pc or 5pc of GDP and substantially increase the number of students reaching postgraduate level.

Likewise, there may be some justification for giving points for international and national research awards but the grant of five points for civil awards from national and provincial governments needs to be reviewed. These awards are not always given on merit and are often gifts to the administration’s favourites.

The question of selectors’ biases also must be addressed. They are once reported to have reduced a woman professor to tears on learning that she had failed to acquire a husband! Educational appointments must not be subject to clearance by intelligence agencies. Regardless of their professional competence, of which they may be proud, these agencies are by conviction and training conservative in outlook and uncomfortable with progressive ideas. The role of the provincial government, especially the chief minister’s (who could have a political axe to grind), may be curtailed and the selection of vice chancellors assigned to non-governmental chancellors’ committees (though one shudders at finding governors working as the ruling party’s agents).

The superior judiciary too has been dragged into Punjab University’s affairs. The professor at the top of the points table was passed over because he had been removed earlier from the VC’s position by the chief justice of Pakistan. The selection committee either balked at the idea of explaining matters to the chief justice of Pakistan or thought the professor concerned had been disqualified for life. The judiciary has a clear duty to intervene if higher educational vacancies are not promptly filled or are filled in violation of law and convention, but it would be grossly unfair to the chief justice to expect him to decide who is qualified to be a vice chancellor and who is not.

On DawnNews

Comments (7) Closed

gnikdks

Jun 07, 2018 11:18am

Great article.

Recommend0

Waseem

Jun 07, 2018 06:36pm

Good points but only for sane people, not for us.

Recommend0

Wasif M Khan

Jun 07, 2018 08:35pm

Try and look even beyond your fairly logical and compelling analysis though you have some facts wrong such as who was on top of the merit list. It has to do with a PML (N) and Mullah party alliance in KP to counter the PTI in the next elections.....see how the pieces fit the puzzle now! And by the way, as you rightly point out learning and its frontiers have nothing to do with the VC selection.

Recommend0

Imran khalid

Jun 07, 2018 11:22pm

Always enjoy reading Mr Rehman’s articles. Thanks

Recommend0

Wildvisions

Jun 08, 2018 10:25am

Students wings or students unions have been accredited by the Constitution. If you don't provide enough opportunities to the students to grow up recreationally and intellectually, how will you expect them to be taking responsibilities as citizens? Supreme Court had given its verdict in the favor of the students union and Yousif Raza Ghillani too had announced in the floor of the assembly to restore the union, but unfortunately this didn't happen. Which PU VC didn't belong to or have an affiliation with a political or religious party in the past? In fact everyone did have attachment including Mujahid Kamran, Gen Arshad and others. If politicians can run and administer the governments, why can't those who teach politics in educational institutions? Man is a social animal as said by Greek philosophers must not be deprived of exercising this right in accordance with the law.

Recommend0

Ismat Beg

Jun 08, 2018 11:30am

An interesting article but we have to look care fully what qualities are needed to be a vice chancellor and then prepare a list of available persons in Pakistan and persuade them to serve that institution. In my opinion VC search committee worked as selection committee and whole burden was on applicant to prove their potentials. No honorable scientist will go for an interview in secretariat before so called VC search committee. Did the search committee went to any leading scientist to persuade him to accept the position? In the present process you can only have these obedient functionaries. Change the process and it is responsibility of search committee to find excellent person.

Recommend0

Shahbaz

Jun 08, 2018 12:16pm

The article written by Rehman sb though appears objective analysis to some, but unfortunately the same is marred with multiple biases. For instance, the author first identified his candidate for whom he did not even bothered to hide his preference and structured his argument accordingly. Another similar illustration is of cat arguing thereby that a jamaiti can never be an unbiased person. This illustration further suggest that all other identities can come out of their biases but a jamaiti can never do this. Moving ahead from this to another pint. PU has been devestated by some vice chancellors who as per author’s criteria can be termed as liberals. What Dr Mujahid Kamran did in his nine years tenure is written on each brick of the university and what was attempted to be done the author’s preferred candidate within his three months tenure by giving precious land of the university to the government that is not even noticeable to author. Let’s grow up and put off our biases.